Genuinely obscure philosophical works?
The least discussed philosopher that I am aware of are Andrew Baxter
Genuinely obscure philosophical works?
Genuinely obscure philosophical works?
The least discussed philosopher that I am aware of are Andrew Baxter
Mandevilles “Fable Of The Bees”
Not obscure
Only obscure work ITT
>Centuries of untranslated Buddhist and Confucian philosophy
>Seventeenth century confessional classical Protestant philosophical theology, which is too religious for most philosophers but too philosophical for most Protestant laymen
>Most Renaissance philosophy for the same reasons
>Seventeenth century confessional classical Protestant philosophical theology, which is too religious for most philosophers but too philosophical for most Protestant laymen
So natural theology?
I mean the sacred theology of classical confessional Lutheran and Anglican theologians that assimilates the philosophical skeleton of medieval-Renaissance Aristotelianism. Melanchthon and Chemnitz are Lutheran examples from the century before. The theology is confessional and based on appeals to the confessions, but the arguments are philosophical and have metaphysical and epistemological consequences.
I consider it Europe's awkward puberty between Renaissance youth and Enlightenment adulthood, when your body is adult (reason, no church) but your mind remains attached to youth (faith).
Post some examples.
Loci Theologici of Johann Gerhard
Loci Theologici of Martin Chemnitz
>Chudsworth
17th century pantheistic Malay sufism
I found this PhD dissertation to be an interesting read. It is basically an attempt to develop Nietzsche's metaphysics and epistemology in a less anthropocentric direction:
https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/153356
>The highest reality is force, or the objective exercise of power. Force is not a coherent substance, and 'Nature' is not a real whole. This is not a pantheistic philosophy. Nature—the natural world—is a hierarchical order of forces, with an agonistically-interacting plurality of fundamental forces at its bedrock. If one were to call these gods, then this outlook is a kind of naturalized polytheism. But mine are not anthropomorphic deities. They are impersonal forces. I deify but do not anthropomorphize inhuman natural forces. Objective vision is not a singular God's-eye view, but a network of agonistically-interacting gods'-eye views reflecting the impersonal 'standpoints' of fundamental forces. My worldview is a naturalistic and polytheistic inhumanism—modern science reinterpreted as a suitable vehicle for re-appropriation in the name of objective paganism. This development is the self-overcoming of modern scientific naturalism.
>This book is therefore religious, in the sense that it is an attempt to actively manifest an immediate receptivity to ultimate grounds of value.
is this an example of a 'pseud' anons of the board keep accusing each other of?
Thank you for this. I have long wished that Nietzsche would expand upon his metaphysics, and I have not found anyone else willing to do so until now.
St. Gregory of Nazianzus. It is actually real.
He is so obsure, if you google "Nazianzus" you will get no result. Google blocks you. You only should type "Gregory of Nazianzus" to get the answer.
That's just not how search queries work. If you google the former, you get the latter.
No blocks on Google Inc.'s end can also be seen on my account.
Just searched Nazianzus and the top results are about Gregory of Nazianzus
>nazi anus
>troony
Neo-Kantian philosopher Afrikan Spir. Influenced Tolstoy and Nietzsche (see "Critical Reception" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afrikan_Spir). His work Thought and Reality is genuinely worth looking at:
https://archive.org/details/PHIThoughtAndRealitySpirAfrikanA./mode/2up
Ramon Llull's Ars Magna. The only thread about Llull I've seen was the thread I made the other day.
(Me)
No wait I take it back. The Proverbia Raemundi is way more obscure.
unironically delete this
too late
What's his writing about?
>Ramon Llull's Ars Magna
Not all that uncommon in Western Esotericism circles.
>Western Esotericism
It's literally western I Ching tbh
The Nature of Man by Polybus
It is a refutation of early presocratics such as Thales, Parmenides and Empedocles. He calls them sophists and says they’re arguing over whether everything is fire or water is pointless because the outcome is one whole so the material substance of the whole is irrelevant.
Alexander of Hales.Summa Universae Theologiae, big work, is hard to find in English, but there is this neat scanned copy.
https://books.google.com/books?id=gfQh0GbbHScC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Alexander+(Halensis.)%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&ovdme=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiV4ZKNiL6FAxXdlYkEHWP_CcQQ6wF6BAgJEAU#v=onepage&q&f=false
qrd?
Literally me
Everyone talks about Nietzsche being influenced by Schopenhauer when it's all diluted Wagner. Not technically philosophical, mostly cultural, but if Nietzche's scribblings count then so do Wagner's.
Hemsterhuis